Glaxo’s Zantac
Executive Summary
Closing arguments completed Aug. 18 in the Glaxo v. Novopharm patent infringement trial with Novopharm lead attorney Robert Green claiming the form 2 ('431) patent is invalid because Glaxo misled the U.S. patent examiner, Green stated that Glaxo is guilty of "inequitable conduct" for including erroneous infra-red spectroscopy and X-ray powder diffraction data to overcome the questions of the patent examiner who issued the Zantac form 2 patent is 1985. Glaxo lead attorney Stephen Judlowe denied the charge of inequitable conduct and defended Glaxo's actions saying that while the submitted data was not appropriate, there was no "intent" on Glaxo's part to mislead the patent examiner. The court is expected to rule on the case by the end of the year.